Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 276 posts

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#91

Post by Broken_Hippo »

kube-system wrote: post #7

I also don’t think it’s even necessary to prevent copyright infringement to achieve a goal of effectively steering people towards paid sources. I often hear arguments that its “easier to pirate movies than use DRM’d software”. But I don’t think this is actually the case for the average non-tech-savvy person. If you can operate a torrent client or even know what one is, you are much savvier than the average Netflix/Ro…

"I often hear arguments that its “easier to pirate movies than use DRM’d software”. But I don’t think this is actually the case for the average non-tech-savvy person. If you can operate a torrent client or even know what one is, you are much savvier than the average Netflix/Roku/etc user."

I don't know many folks that actually torrent things now. If you want to be able to see it offline, sure, or if you want the physical file. It isn't necessary, though. Even if it was, the last torrenting software I used was pretty easy and you didn't need to be that tech savvy to use it.

It doesn't matter because this isn't necessary. Streaming sites exist, and they are definitely easy to use. So long as you have a decent internet connection, there is no real reason to download anything.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#92

Post by dartharva »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #26

Why the conspiracy theory? It works very well to stop piracy (since it's a hassle to have to pick a bottorrent program, install it, deal with it's annoying popups and ads (because you're a normal user and chose a popular bittorrent client), avoid the popups on the pirate bay, know what a magnet link it, find a player for .mkv files. It's easier to pay $15 to buy the show on Amazon. Anyone who disagrees hasn't tried t…

It's always weird how people keep insisting pirating stuff is hard and only for "techies", when all it takes is to go to a trusted website and hit the play or download button. You can literally get pirate streaming sites in google results by searching "watch online", often in reasonable video quality.

I wonder what kind of hoops you have gone through in helping your friends with something as simple as this to have such an opinion.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#93

Post by pbhjpbhj »

kube-system wrote: post #65
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But Netflix has 213 million users Nitpicking, but Netflix has 213 millions subscribers, not users. We don't know how many of them are active or how many people are using them. We simply know they paid one time.

I’ll phrase it another way: in 2020, some number of people collectively decided it was easier to send Netflix 25 billion dollars instead of pirating movies.

It's not because it's easier. People could park in no parking zones, it would be easier, they don't because they've made a moral and/or financial judgement.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#94

Post by pbhjpbhj »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #67
kube-system wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll phrase it another way: in 2020, some number of people collectively decided it was easier to send Netflix 25 billion dollars instead of pirating movies.

Let's look at it from another perspective: in 2020 people collectively decided it was easier to send Netflix $25 billion instead of other forms of entertainment (cinemas, theaters, concert halls, stadium, etc were closed) Pirating skyrocketed as well during 2020 The two things are not adversaries as much as one might think Theatrical releases on streaming services have helped piracy, now you can download a movie mere…

How do those spikes compare to the spikes on sites that you believe to be non-infringing?

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#95

Post by Broken_Hippo »

Uehreka wrote: post #14

So tonight I watched a 1080p pirated copy of Spiderman: Far From Home. And I gotta say, it was kinda crap. The sound would randomly cut out, and the compression was absolute ass (it was the perfect artifact to show people when explaining “not all 1080p’s are created equal”, especially when they’re fighting the water elemental) I really do think that DRM has won folks. We have seen the 4K HDR future, and what we find…

Movies that are theater-only often have very poor copies upfront. Camcorder-in-the-theater sort of poor. The site I use tells folks when it is in cam, and I wait until there are HD versions.

I suggest the same if you want some quality. Streaming pirated stuff takes patience - if you really want to watch things early, with good quality, I'd suggest theaters if those are available to you right now (COVID limits this).

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#96

Post by krylon »

fxtentacle wrote: post #82
netcan wrote: post #54

>> The purpose of DRM is to give content providers leverage against creators of playback devices. This is a good spot to place the pin. The "theological" view is that (1) copyright is a moral right. (2) The Law just protects right against wrong, and(3) economic side effects of laws are incidental. Real life is a lot less naive, so to speak. The commercial intellectual property concerns at stake are are record labels,…

My take: "The purpose of DRM is to give content providers leverage against creators of playback devices and their own consumers." How have I regretted purchasing Blu-Rays in the past. They require an update to the drive firmware, they require their own GPU driver version, they require an update to the player software, and they try to sneak spyware onto my PC anyway. It is almost impossible to legally watch an authent…

It has been like that for a long time. The non-skippable intro screen warning viewers of the evils of unlicensed copying was only ever seen by people not watching an unlicensed copy.

FWIW, I think movies need to take the same route music did. Ever since I found out I could just buy DRM-free high-quality audio at a reasonable price, I have happily paid for the music I like, because it was so very convenient. If it was as convenient to legally buy copies of movies / TV shows, I'd be happy to spend some money for that.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#97

Post by dilyevsky »

kube-system wrote: post #27
dilyevsky wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is drm responsible for the absence of such apps? If anything it’s the dmca systems and an army of lawyers

Technical friction is also a factor. It’s much like speed bumps on a road. They don’t prevent people from going 50 in a 25. But they make it more of a PITA, even when a cop also might pull you over.

Considering the fact many popular releases hit the torrents often times before official version is even available anywhere I dont think your speedbump metaphor is really working here =)

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#99

Post by progbits »

Off-topic but the archive.org page is unusable for me on mobile due to the donation banner: the close button is obscured by the timeline and can't be clicked, "maybe later" replaces it with a different banner asking for contact info which I also can't close.

I love IA and have donated to them before but this is slowly sliding into the dark UX patterns making web unusable.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#100

Post by peoplefromibiza »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #84
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to think that it's people taking from corporations, while UGC is corporations taking from people, spamming them with ads, monetizing their hobbies and selling their personal data. anyway, if I pay for Netflix who has produced their own content, why should I also watch the ads for other Netflix content? Isn't it enough to pay for it?

You get ads on Netflix? Which country are you in?

Italy
Post reply on HN